Back
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
Texon India Private Limited, Rep. by its Authorised Signatory, A. Venkatesan, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
TAW Exports Private Limited, Rep. by its Director, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the common order dated 08.10.2021 passed by the Learned XVIII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai, in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.3460 of 2020.)
1. This petition had been filed seeking to set aside the order passed in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.3460 of 2020 on the file of the XVIII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.
2. It is the contention of the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the petition had been filed seeking to set aside the order passed in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.3460 of 2020, filed by the Defendant seeking leave to defend.
3. It is the further contention of the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that he had filed a suit in O.S.No.3460 of 2020 under Order XXXVII Rule 4 of CPC, and on filing the suit, the Plaintiff issued Judges summons based on which notice had been served within 10 days to the Defendant. The Defendant claims that he was not served with the notice of Judges summons within 10 days as specified in Order XXXVII Rule 3 of CPC. Therefore, he had claimed that his valuable right of defence had been affected and he sought to convert the suit into an ordi
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the provisions of Order XXXVII Rule 4 and Rule 3(4) of CPC regarding the service of summons for judgment in a....
Point of Law : Order of the learned Trial Judge rejecting the application for leave to defend on merits, ought to be substituted by an order rejecting that application as premature.
Entering appearance in interlocutory applications constitutes sufficient notice, negating claims of non-service of summons in summary suits.
The necessity of proper notice before restoring a suit, as it pertains to a defendant's right to defend their case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of proper service of summons as per the requirements of Order V Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The principle of deemed service and the requirement for sufficient cause in delay condonation applications are crucial in determining the validity of service of summons and the acceptance of delay co....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that leave to defend should not be refused unless the defendant's contentions are frivolous and do not raise any triable issue. The court emphasize....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
